switching from linux to microsoft
@zapshe
I used KDE on ArchLinux for many years at work, that's a bleading edge distro where breaking changes are not uncommon; so you have to fix stuff from time to time ...
I have been using BSDs for 20+ years, so KDE (on FreeBSD) whenever a GUI was needed, but yeah; lots of tinkering with Linux software that sometime just never worked.
So when I chose a Linux for home, I went with Kubuntu. It just works. Debian based. Rock solid. No tinkering with stuff. Runs all those Linux only packages... Big bang every few years on major upgrades, but nothing terrible.
I use KDE because it's portable, same reason I used Netscape ... Firefox, actual platform is purpose specific, I never need Windows.
| Too many things to take care of. Change that setting, get this library, use that thing.. |
I have been using BSDs for 20+ years, so KDE (on FreeBSD) whenever a GUI was needed, but yeah; lots of tinkering with Linux software that sometime just never worked.
So when I chose a Linux for home, I went with Kubuntu. It just works. Debian based. Rock solid. No tinkering with stuff. Runs all those Linux only packages... Big bang every few years on major upgrades, but nothing terrible.
I use KDE because it's portable, same reason I used Netscape ... Firefox, actual platform is purpose specific, I never need Windows.
| on 'gaming laptops' which have reduced capacity over top desktops |
Those days are over now. Unless you're buying a top of the line desktop computer with all the bells and whistles, there's usually a laptop-equivalent.
My laptop is more powerful than many desktop setups my friends have. You only have to wait a few months before GPUs that are in desktops are shoved into a laptop by various companies. I don't even find heat to be an issue. My laptop has a vapor chamber. After about a -0.120 undervolt on the CPU, the laptop runs really cool, even when gaming.
I've never gamed on a VM, but if I'm gaming, I want to crank up the settings. I'd assume a VM would drop performance by too much for a real gamer - especially the added latency for a competitive FPS game.
| I never need Windows. |
I can't understand this. You can't game without Windows. Windows has too many things dedicated to it to get the equivalent in Linux can often just be a huge pain.
You probably have different needs, but a big reason for Windows over Linux for me is that while you *CAN* do complicated and wacky things in Windows when you want, you rarely *HAVE* to in order to achieve what you want to do. With Linux, its usually a must - a lot of steps and tinkering to achieve even little things.
You're underestimating the physical constraints that limit laptop performance. In short, you need to be able to supply the components with enough power to do their job, and you need to be able to quickly remove the resulting waste heat.
For a small fortune, you can buy a laptop with a very good CPU that will run well in short bursts but will throttle before too long. For the same money, you can put together a top-of-the-line desktop that runs even faster (if less efficiently) and never throttles. This is unlikely to ever change, unless we find a way to break thermodynamics. Or to put heatsinks in hyperspace, I guess.
For a small fortune, you can buy a laptop with a very good CPU that will run well in short bursts but will throttle before too long. For the same money, you can put together a top-of-the-line desktop that runs even faster (if less efficiently) and never throttles. This is unlikely to ever change, unless we find a way to break thermodynamics. Or to put heatsinks in hyperspace, I guess.
| big reason for Windows over Linux for me is that while you *CAN* do complicated and wacky things in Windows when you want, you rarely *HAVE* to in order to achieve what you want to do. With Linux, its usually a must - a lot of steps and tinkering to achieve even little things. |
Unix was a OS built for engineers. Most things are implemented on a posix platform first. Even using a Cray, back in the day, was posix based.
Perhaps you're forgetting that pretty much all home computing hardware is build for Windows. The fact that it works with some version of Windows should be no surprise. The fact that they also work with Linux is the big story here.
I'd love to see how you get some piece of hardware working with an unsupported version Windows without source code for the drivers.
Last edited on
| You're underestimating the physical constraints that limit laptop performance |
This is true as long as we're trying to compare similar specs on a laptop and desktop. A laptop is usually built with the CPU in mind. Again, mine has a vapor chamber and I undervolted, I only hit 85+ degrees in heavy gaming. I have my CPU running at its max clock speeds all the time and it stays pretty cool.
Compared to many desktops, this laptop consumes less power and has better performance. The performance may not be quiet as good as the "same" components in a desktop, but that doesn't always mean the difference will be night and day.
But the idea that you can only have a truly powerful computer if its a desktop is long gone. For MANY desktop computers, there's a laptop equivalent that can do just as well. I haven't owned a desktop computer in years, laptop performance has just been too great - and I haven't had any thermal issues with the laptop I currently have - even with its great specs.
| Not sure where that comes from, in my experience the opposite is true. |
I'm sure the truth exists somewhere in between, since I have limited Linux experience and I assume you have limited Windows experience.
| I'd love to see how you get some piece of hardware working with an unsupported version Windows without source code for the drivers. |
Windows can usually manage. Windows tends to have "generic" drivers that it can rely on when it can't find specific drivers for a device.
However, I don't recall having any device that Windows couldn't recognize and have a driver for since.... Windows XP? I don't usually hook up unusual things to my computer.
| All software sucks. All hardware sucks. Use whatever hurts the least. |
Also:
| Its down to mind over matter. I don't mind and therefore it doesn't matter. |
Some GUIs have more features than others. That is not a show-stopper.
| zapshe wrote: |
|---|
| I'm sure the truth exists somewhere in between, since I have limited Linux experience and I assume you have limited Windows experience. |
It is good that you acknowledge that you don't know the topic. It is less good that you nevertheless make assumptions.
When do you consider it becomes a thermal issue? When the CPU burns its way through the case?
This is not the same as saying that "the days of laptops being less capable than desktops are over", though. What you're saying is that your laptops have been good enough for you. Really, it says more about how demanding you are of your hardware than of your hardware.
| But the idea that you can only have a truly powerful computer if its a desktop is long gone. [...] I haven't owned a desktop computer in years, laptop performance has just been too great |
laptops are fine. As I said, the vast majority of games target the low-average box among the gaming community, and a good laptop more than meets the requirements there.
the current laptops online cost twice as much, but they match my desktop's specs (bought a couple months back) and my desktop is excessive (so it will run stuff for years to come).
the current laptops online cost twice as much, but they match my desktop's specs (bought a couple months back) and my desktop is excessive (so it will run stuff for years to come).
| It is good that you acknowledge that you don't know the topic. It is less good that you nevertheless make assumptions. |
I'm racist towards Linux :P. Its just my personal experience which would likely have been better if I had more knowledge about Linux. It's mostly personal preference what people *like*, but there's still little doubt in my head that Windows is a better OS for personal use.
You can't game on Linux and it's for "advanced" users, which typically makes advanced things you can do on Windows more complicated in Linux, like undervolting. Getting comfortable with the terminal is a requirement, and it just isn't for me. It makes me feel like I've stepped 30 years into the past. This is all not to mention the fact that finding a solution to a Windows problem is easy - millions of other people probably had the same issue, I can't say the same about Linux - where I can google an issue and find literally nothing.
The bottom line becomes that there's nothing that makes Linux *better* as a personal OS than Windows. Security? I'm sure Linux has a lot more vulnerabilities never patched. Privacy? Microsoft always wants data, which I trust them enough to at least make it anonymous when they get it, but I still use things like shutup10 to stop my computer from sending them anything. I'm more worried about my ISP!
| When do you consider it becomes a thermal issue? When the CPU burns its way through the case? |
When I hit 90+ degrees and my laptop decides to thermal throttle, that's when it becomes a thermal issue.
I use Intel's XTU benchmark to get an idea, my CPU hit a very similar score to a similar spec CPU for desktops.
| Really, it says more about how demanding you are of your hardware than of your hardware. |
I wouldn't really go that far. Most desktop computers have a laptop equivalent in terms of performance. Unless you're going into a niche where you have the best of the best specs. Most people don't want, need, or can even afford those things.
But again, most desktop computers will have a laptop equivalent out there. You might have to go for a higher spec laptop to achieve similar performance, but if you want portability its something you have to pay a little extra for.
Just a few years ago, people would have been skeptical about a laptop like the one I own right now, with this performance and staying cool.
I could have had the i9-10980HK for my laptop, but I just missed it when it came out for the laptop :(
| When I hit 90+ degrees and my laptop decides to thermal throttle, that's when it becomes a thermal issue. |
| Most desktop computers have a laptop equivalent in terms of performance. |
| can even afford those things. |
| When I hit 90+ degrees |
My desktops routinely operate low triple digits. When I stress out the GPUs I go to 180/190.
My best video card, a GTX 1060, makes Windows get unstable if I run the BOINC software using the GPU. It would routinely Blue Screen, and I couldn't get a Windows update to not error out until I stopped letting the client apps use the GPU.
My GT 1030 just hums along, with nary a complaint with my BOINC apps using my 1030's GPU.
Last edited on
That can't be right. Hardware shuts off at around 100° C. Your sensors must be faulty. Either way, I'd repaste the components and fix airflow in the case.
@helios
Maybe Furry Guy is using Fahrenheit units?
That is simply not true anymore, but maybe it was a few years back. Now we can get 32 and 64 core processors from AMD, there's no way with the current design to fit them in a laptop. Admittedly they are expensive, but give it a couple of years, most folks will have them; the price will be much lower.
I have never had any major problems with Linux, the only reason I had to use Windows was to run expensive software for work. I am definitely not an expert in configuring or engineering Linux, I simply haven't had the need to do much tinkering. These days things are much easier with availability of the internet. I was first introduced to UNIX in 1988; I had the first version of Linux in 1991; I have used Linux in one form or another since then, along with Windows; I have Linux exclusively on my personal machine for the last 10 years.
I should mention that I do my gaming on the PlayStation. The thing with that is the number of years between releases: a lot of hardware advancement can happen in that time. Maybe PS 6 could have 64 cores and 256 GB Ram?
https://www.fosslinux.com/43846/reasons-to-use-linux.htm
One thing not mentioned in the above link is Linux clustering. Windows has clustering too, but it sounds as though it certainly ain't free.
Another aspect is the premium that seems to be charged as soon as one starts talking Rack Units, even for relatively low spec machines. Maybe this could change in the future too, the reason being the blurring of the divide between personal and business use. Although I guess that will be offset by the question of just how much computing power does one need personally? I guess one of the problems is large hardware companies charging big prices to businesses that can afford it.
Maybe Furry Guy is using Fahrenheit units?
| zapshe wrote: |
|---|
| But the idea that you can only have a truly powerful computer if its a desktop is long gone. For MANY desktop computers, there's a laptop equivalent that can do just as well. I haven't owned a desktop computer in years, laptop performance has just been too great - and I haven't had any thermal issues with the laptop I currently have - even with its great specs. |
That is simply not true anymore, but maybe it was a few years back. Now we can get 32 and 64 core processors from AMD, there's no way with the current design to fit them in a laptop. Admittedly they are expensive, but give it a couple of years, most folks will have them; the price will be much lower.
I have never had any major problems with Linux, the only reason I had to use Windows was to run expensive software for work. I am definitely not an expert in configuring or engineering Linux, I simply haven't had the need to do much tinkering. These days things are much easier with availability of the internet. I was first introduced to UNIX in 1988; I had the first version of Linux in 1991; I have used Linux in one form or another since then, along with Windows; I have Linux exclusively on my personal machine for the last 10 years.
I should mention that I do my gaming on the PlayStation. The thing with that is the number of years between releases: a lot of hardware advancement can happen in that time. Maybe PS 6 could have 64 cores and 256 GB Ram?
https://www.fosslinux.com/43846/reasons-to-use-linux.htm
One thing not mentioned in the above link is Linux clustering. Windows has clustering too, but it sounds as though it certainly ain't free.
Another aspect is the premium that seems to be charged as soon as one starts talking Rack Units, even for relatively low spec machines. Maybe this could change in the future too, the reason being the blurring of the divide between personal and business use. Although I guess that will be offset by the question of just how much computing power does one need personally? I guess one of the problems is large hardware companies charging big prices to businesses that can afford it.
There is a fundamental difference between (A) program taking input via "mouse press events", where the event's coordinates have to match where windowing system chose to place a "window" and where within the window the application handles those events (aka "has a button"), and (B) program reading input from (text or binary) stream. The former may be convenient for casual use, but if you have to repeat complex input sequences, then reading from file is immensely more efficient and convenient. A program could accept both types of input.
That is not really a Windows vs OSX vs GNU/Linux issue, but about applications. Alas, design philosophy of the various OS has influenced application UI design.
Steam shop lists 788 titles with "SteamOS + Linux" filter. One of them is quite new, big, and Linux users claim that their version is clearly faster than the Windows version (due to OS; filesystem). Apparently they are very happy gaming without Windows.
Your search-fu is weak, young person. Or, more likely, the search engines "conveniently" offer results that match your preferences.
I had a problem. Google did give one hit. Couple years old thread. Even that was a person with similar problem asking. No responses, but the OP had figured it out, at least partially. That was enough for me to solve my issue.
The embarrassing part: the OP was ... me. I just had forgotten.
I did once sell my monitor before I got a new one. For some days I had to use Windows without display. Yes, you *CAN* do that, can you?
That is not really a Windows vs OSX vs GNU/Linux issue, but about applications. Alas, design philosophy of the various OS has influenced application UI design.
| zapshe wrote: |
|---|
| You can't game without Windows. |
Steam shop lists 788 titles with "SteamOS + Linux" filter. One of them is quite new, big, and Linux users claim that their version is clearly faster than the Windows version (due to OS; filesystem). Apparently they are very happy gaming without Windows.
| zapshe wrote: |
|---|
| This is all not to mention the fact that finding a solution to a Windows problem is easy - millions of other people probably had the same issue, I can't say the same about Linux - where I can google an issue and find literally nothing. |
Your search-fu is weak, young person. Or, more likely, the search engines "conveniently" offer results that match your preferences.
I had a problem. Google did give one hit. Couple years old thread. Even that was a person with similar problem asking. No responses, but the OP had figured it out, at least partially. That was enough for me to solve my issue.
The embarrassing part: the OP was ... me. I just had forgotten.
| zapshe wrote: |
|---|
| big reason for Windows over Linux for me is that while you *CAN* do complicated and wacky things in Windows when you want, |
I did once sell my monitor before I got a new one. For some days I had to use Windows without display. Yes, you *CAN* do that, can you?
@zapshe
Why would you assume that?
Like I said,
| I assume you have limited Windows experience. |
| I don't recall having any device that Windows couldn't recognize |
| pretty much all home computing hardware is build for Windows. The fact that it works with some version of Windows should be no surprise. |
| helios wrote: |
|---|
| Hardware shuts off at around 100° C. |
It doesn't when my sensors are calibrated for Fahrenheit display. 180-190F. I was remiss in not including that vital datum point in my earlier post.
Last edited on
| If you're undervolting to stay within the cooling system's capacity then you're applying a manual throttle. |
I don't believe it works like that. I'm starving the CPU of power and telling it to work at the same clock speeds. This doesn't slow the CPU down, but instead gets rid of excess power consumption that would have only generated more heat.
| How hot does it get while running Prime95 under the "maximum heat" setting? |
I might try that out later.
| Exactly what magic do you think these equivalent laptops are pulling to do the same work for much less power? |
Two different components can use different amounts of power and achieve vastly different performance. A laptop version of a higher end CPU can outperform a desktop version of a lower spec CPU. Its about the design of the CPU itself.
| And if it is possible to optimize a component to such a degree, why wouldn't manufacturers apply those same optimizations to desktop computers? |
Again, a laptop version of a CPU can be lower powered than the desktop version, but that only means you need a higher spec CPU for the laptop to keep up. It can cost a little extra, but you'll receive comparable performance.
| It's interesting you mention affordability, because even if all I cared about was performance, I wouldn't be able to afford the absolute best laptop on the market (which would still be less capable than my computer anyway). |
The best laptop on the market is not as capable as your desktop? That's a bold claim, seeing how powerful some laptops are out there.
But going on price, I wouldn't compare desktop and laptop CPU prices. No one buys laptop CPUs directly, they come with the product and the end-user only worries about a single price tag.
| Admittedly they are expensive, but give it a couple of years, most folks will have them; the price will be much lower. |
Laptops usually lag behind a bit, but there will probably be a manufacturer integrating those components in a laptop at some point.
| Steam shop lists 788 titles with "SteamOS + Linux" filter. One of them is quite new, big, and Linux users claim that their version is clearly faster than the Windows version (due to OS; filesystem). Apparently they are very happy gaming without Windows. |
Sure, but there's over 30,000 games on steam for Windows. The game has to support Linux, the anti-cheat, etc.. I couldn't play the games that I play right now without Windows.
| Your search-fu is weak, young person |
I found my professors assignments online. In Japanese. My search-fu is quite strong sensei. But, here's an example of an issue I had. This was for my assembly class, and I was using DDD. I had an issue where the debugger on it would infinitely load. Google gave me literally nothing. I went onto stack overflow, they didn't figure it out.
After I solved the issue my self and posted the solution, a guy on there (who seems to be very knowledgeable about assembly and Linux), was very amused at what was causing the problem. The issue was that I needed a particular library installed, but the debugger never checks if it was installed before trying to open! Its a very tricky issue, especially since it was one of those things that you'd expect Linux to install for you by default.
| I did once sell my monitor before I got a new one. For some days I had to use Windows without display. Yes, you *CAN* do that, can you? |
Can I use Windows without a display? Why would I? I could SSH into it if I wanted to, but what would I do? Open up COD and game?
| Why would you assume that? |
Because you don't like it :) If you were as comfortable with Windows as I am, you probably would have no hate towards it. The same likely is true for me, if I was as comfortable with Linux as you were, I'd likely have a lot less hostility towards it. Its just an assumption based on what I deemed to be probable.
Didn't mean to send the space ship to Venus instead of Mars.
| zapshe wrote: |
|---|
| I assume you have limited Windows experience. |
| If you were as comfortable with Windows ... |
Amount of experience is unrelated to how comfy something is.
First impressions can be nice, but over time -- learning all the dirty details -- one will obtain knowledge-based opinion.
On the other hand, the first impression could be so horrid that you never look back and thus never find the hidden gem.
| zapshe wrote: |
|---|
| You can't game without Windows. |
| I couldn't play the games that I play right now without Windows. |
The generalization, "you can't", is false. The much more specific "zapshe can't" is easier to accept.
Ah, the OS Holy Wars rage on.
While I use Windows I won't disparage anyone who uses *nix or Mac as if they are heathens. The most I will do is admit I am not familiar enough even after trying an alternate OS to state emphatically "*insert OS name* is the only logical OS to use."
I am comfortable with what I use and incuriously unadventurous (and broke more than enough) to want to muck around. In my younger days I could afford the agita and expense of experimenting. No more.
Windows and Mac occupy niche markets, *nix is on more than PCs.
While I use Windows I won't disparage anyone who uses *nix or Mac as if they are heathens. The most I will do is admit I am not familiar enough even after trying an alternate OS to state emphatically "*insert OS name* is the only logical OS to use."
I am comfortable with what I use and incuriously unadventurous (and broke more than enough) to want to muck around. In my younger days I could afford the agita and expense of experimenting. No more.
Windows and Mac occupy niche markets, *nix is on more than PCs.
| I'm starving the CPU of power and telling it to work at the same clock speeds. This doesn't slow the CPU down |
| Two different components can use different amounts of power and achieve vastly different performance. A laptop version of a higher end CPU can outperform a desktop version of a lower spec CPU. Its about the design of the CPU itself. |
| The best laptop on the market is not as capable as your desktop? |
| No one buys laptop CPUs directly, they come with the product and the end-user only worries about a single price tag. |